this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
76 points (89.6% liked)

Games

16737 readers
475 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Another remaster that misses the point

Today Blizzard announced remasters of its classic fantasy real-time strategy hits Warcraft I&II, the games that put it on the map in the distant, functional past of the ‘90s. I should be celebrating; the second Warcraft as unequivocally my favorite game as a young child. I spent God only knows how many hundreds of hours playing it, and even He eventually got bored of watching me make my own horrible little maps and walked away. These remasters, though? They ain’t it.

I’ll preface this by saying that I’m very glad these classics remain playable. I’m sure Blizzard’s making a pretty penny off doing so, but at least it’s keeping its history alive. That said, I will be playing these re-releases with the new graphics turned off, because just look at them:

Warcraft Remastered Battle Chest Launch Trailer

The art looks basic and generic where the original pixels inspired imagination, letting your mind fill in the gaps of these units’ physical features. Some, like Ogres and Ogre Magi, appeared almost photorealistic to young me, who sought to recreate them (over and over and over) in drawings and other, larger-scale art projects. In trying to more fully inhabit this universe whose collection of Little Guys inspired me to dare to dream, I constructed life-sized (relative to an eight-year-old) paper dolls of nearly every unit in the game. It was my Everest, entirely because – again – the original game left room for interpretation.

Now admittedly, I’m no longer a small child fueled entirely by starry-eyed wonder, and that’s definitely part of the problem. But Warcraft’s original look was a product of its limitations, and trying to pave over that with plastic-y sheen is a mistake. I don’t know who the new graphics are for – I doubt these old games are going to lure in many new players, especially with art that looks like it belongs in a vastly less-intricate game than Warcraft – but it’s certainly not me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Seeders@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

D2 always looked like shit to me. D2R is the first time that game has been playable for me. Especially with wide screen support and the ability to bind quick cast keys. D2R is top tier.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

D2 looked amazing to me but I was on a 640x480 CRT in 2000-2001, so my little imagination put it all together. But damn shit fuck, D2R was done SO WELL.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I swear I played D2 at 800x600 - was that enabled in the expansion pack?

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 11 hours ago

You’re 100% correct! I upgraded later, but my fam had a horrid Celeron machine for most of my life and it needed low rez to play well. ATI RAGE II I believe.

[–] Seeders@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Even back in the day I felt it was too cramped and awkward. I was more of a starcraft kid.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I loved StarCraft but Diablo REALLY brought me to imagination town. The graphics were such shit but the world was so huge and dark and deep, I loved Diablo sooooo much when I was young. I was just flabbergasted by how much D2R looked like what I had imagined. I went back to the original graphics settings (with filters to make it traditional) and it was HORRIBLE. but as a kid… I was so enthralled.

[–] Seeders@sh.itjust.works 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

the "original graphics" settings in D2:R are far worse than what D2 actually looked like. I dont know exactly whats wrong with it, but if you actually have D2 and run it, it looks much better.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 hours ago

Oh you’re not wrong! There’s a special filter you can enable in settings that makes it look more true to what you would have seen on a CRT monitor. When first switched to original settings I was like “absolutely no way it was this shitty” hahahaha